But when it comes to art, you just have to allow for a little chaos and non-linearity.

For a little imperfection and laissez-faire, if not downright sloppiness…

So… be kind to yourselves! And keep your fanaticism at bay!

Excellence?

Why, yes… !

Perfection?

Why bother… ?

St. Jerome wrote: “Perfectio vera in coelestibus” – true perfection is only to be found in heaven.

And so be it.

Toodle-oo!

*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***

Wait a minute…

Aristotle distinguishes three different concepts.That is perfect,

1. which is complete – which contains all the requisite parts; 2. which is so good that nothing of the kind could be better; and 3. which has attained its purpose.Leibniz wrote: “Perfection, I call any simple quality, if it is positive and absolute, such that, if it expresses something, it does so without limits.”

Post navigation

13 thoughts on “How To Be An Artist, Part Two”

Well, yes. This may be a question of definition of words again.
Anyone knows: There is not a really perfect thing on earth
(that is why St. Jerome wrote: – true perfection is only to be found in heaven).

But I think it would make no sense to through away this word “perfect”. I would agree with Leibniz. Especially in art the imperfect often is the adequate stadium for what you exactly want to express –
and can be called therefore a “perfect” work.

But to try to get close to what you are looking can mean to get as imperfect, as loose, as preliminary, as temporary, as simple as art ever has been done.
On the other hand if you tend to work longer harder or more precise this does not keep you from failing to reach what you are hoping for.

So I think it does make no sense to say “Perfectionism” is a trap.
The question should be a different one, not the pro and cons of “perfect”, “excellece”, “ideal”. The real risk you are taking is – at any strategy you prefer – to miss the proper relation of form and content, to miss the perfection that comes with the “ideal” combination – that can mean to do the most simpel thing in the most silly way and and and.

I would call a simple piece of bread with butter, a Bob Dylan song, one raw sketch on napkin as “perfect” as so called masterpieces. And having said that, this does not make the so called masterpiece, magnum opus, the Jahrhundertwerk less delicious and “perfect” for me.

It is broadening the mind if you are able to find pleasure amongst both extremes.
Fanaticism only lies in instisting on the strategy one prefers without understanding the other strategies. I´m hope I´m learning.

And I don’t think that missing the proper relation of form and content would be a real risk.
At least I wouldn’t call it a risk.
Just a possible outcome.
Artistic failure as opposed to artistic success.
The risk of perfectionism?
Rigidity?
Intolerance?
You just don’t have to be perfect.
Because you have a right to make mistakes.
Artists as well as anybody else.

I pointed out that this is a contradiction within itself. And he became very, very angry. He blamed me of intellectual hairsplitting, talking like a lawyer or something. I shut up, because he blamed me of what he himself started – he was yelling at himself. Ok, at least he did some good “bad paintings” with funny titles (uh, don´t tell him, he will yell again!).

The trash painter party is the most intolerant to my expierience. Maybe because they need to defend their week position?

Well, maybe I still do not get it?!?
But what is the use of insisting on making mistakes if we commit them constantly anyway?
We should not feel too bad about that, it is only natural. Why shouldn´t we care about the rare exceptions, the little and bigger masterpieces?

I know, exceeded demands are “hazard to your mental health”. Too high expectations can crush you. If you are longing for something but it seems too hard to do it can become “one big, alluring trap”. It depends, for the one this trap may be “perfection” for the other one to “lower his expectations”. Risky live anyway … for artists as well as anybody else.